ok that title was harsh..... but seriously i regret buying this game. i got the demo and i thought it was the COOLEST thing in the world and i could not WAIT for it to come out... when it did come out i got it on the first day and went home and loaded it into my cpu only to find out that you cant change anything..... what im saying is, you can play singleplayer games but all you can change is the ai diffuculty and the actual map. do you know why i loved bf1942/desert combat? ("no and i dont care") its because i was able to start a game by myself with more than 30 players and make the teams fair (team ratio 1:3) AND i was able to set a time limit or a ticket limit... it was so awesome! but now, if i want to actually control ALL of the spawn points on hard mode, i wont have enough time because theres so little tickets and it takes time to control all the points. and now you cant even play coop without a mod (and a very buggy mod from what i hear (http://battlefield2.filefront.com/file/BF2_COOP_mod_30;45461x#671332 read the descriptions))!!! what im trying to say is that BF1942 is better than BF2 because there are no options in bf2! no, im not trying to change the world by having ea games come out with a "more options" mod because they wont, (i cant find the interview but its out there) im just venting here and wondering if im the only one that feels like this.
WTF ea games:moon:
I do fell I wasted my money and time on this but hey I got all the battlefields to kick this games butt!
I got, BF:V and all BF:42...BF2 is ok...ehh, not my fav. I wouldnt waste money on a server
No co-op was a bad move, but BF2 rocks. There are more mods now that let you play bigger single player maps with tickets and enemy. Try Mercs. If BF was any example, then I would expect lots of cool mods, and the odds are you'll find one even you like... Desert Combat was light years better than BF. I was really disappointed with the helos at first, pigs compared to the Apache in DC. I shouldn' have been suprised, because the helos in BFV were bogus too, compared to apaches. But i've gotten used to them, and now I'm an airborne meat eater again :smokin:
I played bf2 and then switched to bf vietnam. But bf2 is still better i think. Although vietnam is fun!:D
when i first got the game i was abit disapointed, mostly by the extremely demanding graphics and the fact that the game had no options, but what bugged me the most was how damn in accurate all the weapons are. i hate having to lay down and shoot one shot at a time so that i might hit the guy who is two feet from me.:ak3: :nono:
I didn't make it!
I don't really see what you're sulking over... Of course the games are different, hence the name.. "Battlefield 2".... (2)!!!! ok. you see the number... :mad: Sorry if i seem harsh but its only a small problem. Other then that the games perfectly fine. (i.e. Graphics, Gameplay (not what you mentioned) Physics - Could do with more maps but this game is just so addictive + Vehicles etc...) :deal:
Snipes With Artillery
22nd March 2005
I still am one with BFV, the vee-hickles are great, you get music, good weapons, you can change your skin, you can spot for artillery, move spawns, etc. I love being able to transport a tank or a boat or artillery to anywhere on a map with a Huey. BF2, I still don't like too much...
Moving to a more suitable section .... Rants and raves. seems it never ends. :D
It was well known by most ppl before BF2 was released that it was primarily a MP game. Most ppl knew that the SP was a practice only and that there was no CO-OP (official that is).
Ok maybe some ppl didn't realise it was going to be like that, but I stressed to most ppl who asked that if they were buying for single player they would be better of with something like Far Cry. However I do expect that there will be some improvement in the COOP mods as time goes by.
BF2 doesn't suck by any means, what you are saying is, "it sucks because I was expecting a clone of BF1942". :D BF2 is exactly what it was designed to be, BF2.